Why is President Bush against arming Pilots?

Question | September 28, 2001 | Search4Truth

[Search4Truth]

I really need an answer to this question. I don't understand why President Bush is opposing arming pilots. This simple measure could have averted this whole tragedy.

Don't these pilots already command a tremendous amount of respect by the millions of people they safely fly to their destinations every day? Instead we are going to be escorted by armed Marshals. This solution is consistent with the anti-gun lobby that we are to be protected by the government, but not allowed to protect ourselves.

Why is it that President Bush seems to be taking this anti-gun position? This does not make sense. He asks us to trust him, by being patient; I am willing to do so. I have confidence in him. He appears to be an honorable man. But why does he not trust us to protect ourselves. Pilots are probably one of the most qualified people to carry a gun on his airplane. What other professions commands more respect than commercial airline pilots. They all look like my dad. And it is this pilot, the captain of the ship, the last line of defense, that MUST be armed. He is ultimately the one in control of the plane and the one ultimately responsible for its safety.

How can we trust President Bush, when he apparently does not trust us? President Bush now has the opportunity to mend a deep wound of distrust between many Americans and the Federal government. I hope he will do so by trusting us to protect ourselevs. We trust him!

I pray to God that he is indeed the man he presents himself to be. If he is, he MUST allow us to protect ourselves. 7,000 dead Americans should have already awakened us to that fact. I'm not willing to fly again until I know the pilot is armed.

[soxfan]

Then why is it necessary for the military to take the unprecedented, unspeakable, and previously unimaginable, step that authorizes, under certain circumstances, blowing a civilian airliner full of Americans out of the sky? "Let's see, we'll allow fighters to shoot down civilians, BUT ARMING THE PILOT????!!!! Are you CRAZY or something? That'd be REALLY dangerous"

[Search4Truth]

"Then why is it necessary for the military to take the unprecedented, unspeakable, and previously unimaginable, step that authorizes, under certain circumstances, blowing a civilian airliner full of Americans out of the sky? "Let's see, we'll allow fighters to shoot down civilians, BUT ARMING THE PILOT????!!!! Are you CRAZY or something? That'd be REALLY dangerous"

My point exactly. Is President Bush anti-gun? It sure looks like it. Why does he not trust us to protect ourselves?

[chemainus]

Our airlines do not have Egyptian pilots associated with bin laden as the Egyptian suicide flight did. Pilots should be armed and trained as the captain of any large vehicle is. Bush ' hesitance is in not wanting to offend the anti-gunners whom he also wants in th "coalition".

[chemainus]

Bush is also NWO....this terror incident is just the right catalyst to speed up the New World Order by 100 years... Bilderbergers all.

[mmmmmmmm....... donuts]

Um--don't you think the TERRORISTS might also pull a gun?

[InfraRed]

Someone else posted that graphic to a thread yesterday. It sums up my perspective quite well. The atrocities would probably have never happened, if the terrorists even thought some of the passengers might be armed.

When is the last time you saw someone trying to take hostages at a police station, FBI headquarters, or gun show?

[InfraRed]

Each pilot American should be able to decide for himself or herself if they want to carry a gun. They're the ones putting their lives on the line.

[Search4Truth]

"Someone else posted that graphic to a thread yesterday. It sums up my perspective quite well. The atrocities would probably have never happened, if the terrorists even thought some of the passengers might be armed."

To my mind, that makes everyone who has worked so hard to create these kill zones of disarmed Americans, complicit in the deaths of 7,000 Americans. Are we to add President Bush to that list?

[FoundersRWatching]

You are echoing my thoughts exactly. The sadest day of this entire disaster is that people (pilots) fearing for their lives and safety have to BEG a Federal Government for the means to protect themselves and their charges!!! Even under the most tortured definition of the Second Amendment, this is a OUTRAGE!!! And if that weren't bad enough, OUR OWN PRESIDENT SAYS "NO"!!!??? And we call this freedom?? I,for one ,refuse to fly until pilots are allowed to carry weapons. This simple act would have thwarted ALL of the hijackings!! Regardless of your stance on gun control, the right to defend yourself being totally controlled by the Federal Gov't should concern everyone. Ask yourself one question, Is it easier to train a pilot, usually x-military, about the use of firearms in a hijacking situation, or teaching and training an air marshall about the multitude of interacting mechanical, electrical, and hydrolic systems in a 757?? I think the answer is obvious. I also dislike the fact that our Government is willing to risk our lives simply to retain sole control of personal protection making us totally dependant on it for survival. I believe I can protect myself far better than any Government!!

[RandallFlagg]

Great 'Toon!

I'd like to find one that shows a big group of cheerful passengers cleaning their guns together, chatting about ballistics and preferential calibers while four bullet-riddled terrorist's corpses lay smoldering in the lower compartments with box-cutters rammed up their arses!

[Search4Truth]

"Um--don't you think the TERRORISTS might also pull a gun?

So be it. At least we would have a fighting chance. Rather die in a fire fight, than be turned into a bomb to kill thousands of my fellow Americans.

[verity]

"I'm not willing to fly again until I know the pilot is armed."

Cowards can walk!

[Search4Truth]

"Cowards can walk!"

Have you heard of trains?

Your kind of courage we can do without. Thanks for your thoughtful response.

[InfraRed]

Um--don't you think the TERRORISTS might also pull a gun?

First, being non-citizens, they would not be allowed to carry on domestic flights. I don't have a solution for international flights, but these were not international flights.

Second, even IF they managed to sneak a weapon onto the plane, and even IF they managed to shoot a passenger or two, their evil plot would NEVER have reached fruition and killed thousands.

[lawgirl]

I have two concerns about guns on planes. 1) the terrorists could wrestle the guns away from the pilots and then the plane has terrorists with guns and then the whole plane is really screwed and 2) from what I have read, the verdict is out on those bullets that don't go through airplane walls--methinks that depressurization would be a really crappy way to die.

What about stun guns and pepper spray? I'll bet every flight attendant has pepper spray or mace on them now! LOL!

[KirklandJunction]

Don't wait for the plane to turn into a bomb.
When they know they can't get to the flight controls, they won't even bother buying a ticket.
WTC occupants would kinda'like that idea.

[super175]

I would say some think arming a pilot could be very dangerous.

What would happen if a bunch of guys try to take over the cabin. Then when the captain comes out with guns drawn, they bum rush him.

The hijackers then have a gun.

It is no different than the logic behind why some prison guards have no gun either...

[Melinator]

OOOOOoooo! That would be scary. Better to quietly cower in fear, dialing 911 on your cell phone, while the Terrorists fly you into a building, or a Stadium full of people.

Forget the billions of dollars worth of new ineffective security measures and forget billion dollar Airline bailouts. Arm Pilots and get a decent bulkhead door installed on the planes, and I predict no more deliberate plane crashes, and a renewed and improved sense of safety amongst the flying public. These simple, common sense, inexpensive measures would actually work. That is why the Government doesn't want to employ them. Not enough sex appeal, and definately not enough expansion of Government control.

Besides, the Sheeple will happily pay for and submit themselves to it: an opportunity which has not gone unnoticed and will not be missed.

[super175]

On those Israeli flights they have two bullet proof doors going to the cabin and and armed guard in between. If you get through one of them (which is a pain in the @ss), someone is going to give you a hot lead shot in the head.

Also I would imagine they have undercover people too in the cabins.

In the worst case scenario they might hurt some people in the cabin, but they ain't taking the controls...

Armed guards are fine, but uniformed guards on airlines would not. If they know who has the guns, they can just kill that guy first. If they don't know who is who, that is a whole different matter.

What about that Egypt Air flight? Everyone keeps saying it was a suicide crash of a commercial airliner.

What happens if they get a mole through things and the actual pilot is the guy who wants to hijack the plane? He could shoot the co-pilot then have his way.

Without guns, they could at least start "rasslin' " over the controls.

[citizenK]

They're the ones putting their lives on the line.

I agree with this sentiment.
However, for the fact that the government is taking away even the nail clippers of pilots, the idea that they will ever allow them to carry guns is unlikely to a high degree.